It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by ScatterBrain
Soooo....for the last 4 years the "chemtrails" that they have been spraying for the last 20+ years have been having a negative effect on your plants?
Can you think of any reason why I would be skeptical of the causal relationship you're establishing here?
Originally posted by adeclerk
reply to post by ScatterBrain
Basically, if "chemtrails" have been sprayed for the past 20 years, why did it not affect the plants earlier than 4 years ago? Most likely because there is no connection. There's no reason to connect water vapor in the sky to the ailing health of your plants, anyway.
Edit: Not implicating that you are unintelligent, brother, just pointing out that there is no basis for the causal relationship you have established.edit on 5/30/12 by adeclerk because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by VoidHawk
Many people researching chemtrails say they contain metals of various types. Now, any electrical activity in the atmosphere would without doubt interact with metal particles.
If we imagine a fine layer of metal particles fairly evenly spread throughout the atmosphere, and we then scan the area with radar not much will show up UNLESS there’s some electrical activity.
If a craft using anti gravity for example were to enter an atmosphere that is full of metal particles it will cause one of two things to happen.
1. The metal particles will be attracted to the craft, or each other.
2. The metal particles will be repelled away from the craft.
Question: What IF these chem trail particles had a coating on them? What IF they were not distributed "evenly"?
Thank you in advance
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
I’m sorry but Everything that is done in regards to government, as you well know is compartmentalized. I can see by the pictures you shared (thank you) that you are passionate about flight. However, are you comfortable saying that because you have not witnessed this activity where you worked, it just isn’t happening? I don’t wish to be rude but, I think that is pretty naïve. I offered the share the dissertations with you to demonstrate why I have come to my conclusion. I respectfully disagree with your argument sir, I see it as weak at best. Nice pictures though.
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
I disregarded all the part where you explain to me what contrails are and the differences in them from yesteryear, I saw it as a red herring (distraction from the issue). (If you elaborate on the chemicals compounds that come naturally from combustion engine exhaust (like salt or something), then maybe you would compel me to look into that as well).
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
Your comments in regard to respiratory issues.. I laughed, nice play on words.
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
Well actually, you actually said something here that supports my conclusion not yours. I believe the material being sprayed does effect the ph levels. Actually, I am not sure your profession but, really smart guys in the field a chemistry say this is so (and much more). I am assuming they are smart guys because the government uses them
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
To say it is a stretch that I am blaming something that is happening at 30k feet above my head, would be a good argument if people didn’t make errors. The fish showing up on the banks, and the birds dropping from the skies in my opinion demonstrate a lack of consistency . Reports also indicate issues that are consistent with problems distributing this technology evenly. Oopsy right
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
Question: What IF these chem trail particles had a coating on them? What IF they were not distributed "evenly"?
Thank you in advance
Originally posted by tennesseewatchdog
Interesting thoughts on the reason for Chemtrails. I have heard of the rason for spraying is depopulation,
failing at that hiding Planet X, weather modification, and now locating UFO,s. You may have something. There are metal fillings in the chemtrails .....
Originally posted by VoidHawk
Hi ScatterBrain
I'm not quite sure what your getting at so I'll assume your question is - Would a coating or uneven distribution blow my theory apart. ??
Not at all, I asked those questions to engage in a thesis type dialog with you. I know little about this stuff, I just happened upon some information when I was trying to figure out if chemtrails might have been the cause to the problems I listed in a previous post. I'm not the smartest woman in the beauty shop but, from what I read, It seemed to support my conclusion but, I know, I have a habit of not completely thinking things though... ( I was reading about experiments with coatings on mineral particles). So when I saw your statements I was just picking your brain, I in no way intended to offend, I was more hoping to toss around ideas in regards to the possiblities, if that makes sense.
Its difficult to prevent electromagnetic influence on metal particles. You would need to shield them, but how?
I dont see how a coating could achieve that.
Maybe not, but if we are able to give a virus a coating, why couldn't mineral particles be coated with some material to meet the needs (whatever they are).
Uneven distribution is not a problem. Imagine a cubic meter of space with particles floating about in it. even if most of the particles moved to one side of that space they would on average still be spaced apart.
Now imagine one side/face of your cube is magnetic. All the particles would now stick to that surface. To a radar it would look like a sheet of metal and become very visible.
Ah, makes sense thank you. But, if say hypothetically, the objective was to specifically target certain areas as well as specific effects, including timing (eh.. I am so not good at saying what I am trying to say with words ;( ).
I realy dont know much about chemtrails. As I said in the op, I believe something is being sprayed, I just have a problem believing that its deliberately harmful because even those spraying it will eventualy breath the same air that we breath.
I would have to agree that if any harm is caused, it may not be intential. But, I can't rule that out either simply because we have a lot of cool warfare stuff and that does intend to harm.
Hope I understood your question properly
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
eh.. I am so not good at saying what I am trying to say with words ;( ).
Originally posted by defcon5
JP exhaust is nothing more then diesel gas (kerosene), the only differences between diesel, kerosene, and JP is the amount of sulfur and additives. When airport diesel ground equipment is fueled, its done with the same JP that goes into the aircraft themselves. So the pollutants created by JP are the same as what comes from a diesel truck. This is simple to look up, and I am sure that you can do so without my help.
Diesel fuel is about 18% heavier than gasoline and consists mainly of hydrocarbons that range from C10 to C24, meaning 10 to 24 carbon atoms with various configurations of hydrogen atoms attached to the carbon atoms. Gasoline, on the other hand, is usually in the C7 to C11 range, while kerosene, used for jet engine fuel, is weighted just between diesel and gasoline in the C12 to C15 range. The higher the number of carbon atoms, the heavier the product.
It was specified in 1990 by the U.S. government as a replacement for government diesel fueled vehicles.
The U.S. Air Force replaced JP-4 with JP-8 completely by the fall of 1996, to use a less flammable, less hazardous fuel for better safety and combat survivability.
The U.S. Navy uses a similar formula, JP-5. JP-5 has an even higher flash point of > 60 °C (140 °F), but also a higher cost, limiting its use to aircraft carriers and other situations where the danger of fire is greatest.
Outside of powering aircraft, JP-8 is used as a fuel for heaters, stoves,[1] tanks,[2] by the U.S. military as a replacement for diesel fuel in the engines of nearly all tactical ground vehicles and electrical generators, and as a coolant in engines and some other aircraft components. The use of a single fuel greatly simplifies logistics.
JP-8 is formulated with icing inhibitor, corrosion inhibitors, lubricants, and antistatic agents, and less benzene (a carcinogen) and less n-hexane (a neurotoxin) than JP-4. However, it also smells stronger than JP-4. JP-8 has an oily feel to the touch, while JP-4 feels more like a solvent.
Originally posted by ScatterBrain
reply to post by defcon5
Since you say you are 100% certain there is nothing to this, and since you limit your mind to the possibilities of our modern technologies, there is no point in carrying this conversation further with you. Good day.